democracy
democracy
AU Vote a Setback for South Africa
The 18th Summit of the African Union (AU) that took place in Addis Ababa last week has led to a sudden surge of interest into the workings of the organisation. This is due to the intense battle for chairperson that was fought between the incumbent former Gabonese Foreign Minister, Jean Ping, and South African Home Affairs Minister, Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma.
The Constitutive Act of the African Union stipulates that the 10 key members of the AU Commission – effectively the bureau of the AU – will be elected every four years. The chairperson, deputy chair and commissioners can serve a maximum of two four-year terms with the chair and deputy chair elected by the Assembly of Heads of State and Government during a secret ballot, as was held on 30 January 2012. Each of Africa’s five regions may have two members on the commission (including chair and deputy chair), who are elected by the Executive Council (consisting of foreign ministers of member states) following the outcome of the vote on the chair and deputy chair.
Since its inception in 2002, the AU has had three chairpersons: former Ivorian Foreign Minister, Amara Essy, former Malian President, Alpha Omar Konaré, and Ping, elected in February 2008. Many had expected Ping to be re-elected to this position at last week’s summit, since he was generally seen as a relatively effective mediator and managed to find consensus among member states on a number of key peace and security issues. Some accuse him of not being strong enough to take a stand on issues like the controversial North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) military intervention in Libya in 2011. In addition, the AU as an organisation still remains hugely lacking. It is understaffed, with 324 vacant posts, which is 48 percent of its staff compliment. Many departments also underspend massively on their budgets with an average budget utilisation of 37 percent.
South Africa’s bid to have its home affairs minister and former foreign minister Dlamini-Zuma elected to the position of chairperson was only announced late in 2011. However, SA’s Minister of International Relations and Cooperation, Maite Nkoane-Mashabane, told the media at the summit, that the unanimous decision to put forward Dlamini-Zuma’s candidacy was taken by all Southern African Development Community (SADC) member states at its summit in August 2011.
After much behind-the-scenes lobbying the Assembly proceeded with three rounds of voting and no candidate managed to achieve a two-thirds majority – the requirement for the election of chairperson. During the fourth round of voting, where Ping was the only candidate, he still failed to get two-thirds of the votes and the election was suspended. Ping, his chairperson, Erastus Mwencha, and the entire team of commissioners will now stay on until the next summit that will be held in Lilongwe, Malawi in June this year. It is still unclear whether Ping and Dlamini-Zuma will be allowed (or would want) to stand again for election to this position.
For SA and for its foreign policy, this is a serious setback. While the fact that Ping couldn’t achieve a two-thirds majority in the final round is indicative of a unified response from SADC member states, SA as a powerhouse on the continent was expecting to win this election, the voting also indicates that opposition to Dlamini-Zuma was similarly intractable.
One of the two main reasons for the outcome is undoubtedly the foreign policy blunders made by SA during the term of President Jacob Zuma, especially during 2011. In both major crises the continent faced last year, in Côte d’Ivoire and in Libya, SA was seen to act without due consultation and made a number of contradictory decisions when it came to peace and security issues. South Africa’s stance on the Ivorian crisis in early 2011, where it was seen to favour the incumbent Laurent Gbagbo, especially angered Nigeria, the regional powerhouse. The fact that SA voted in favour of Resolution 1973 of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) that authorised a no-fly zone against former Libyan dictator, Muammar Gaddafi, and soon afterwards strongly opposed NATO’s military intervention in Libya - was also extremely harmful to the country’s reputation. Key countries, the United Kingdom and France in particular, subsequently abused the UNSC resolution to pursue a regime-change strategy and SA was left to scramble for cover. Dlamini-Zuma, a fearless and strong willed politician, who is extremely highly regarded for her management skills and work ethic, was in this sense the victim of her country’s foreign policy, despite the fact that she was standing as a regional candidate on behalf of Southern Africa.
The second, and perhaps more important reason for her failure to secure the position – at least in this round – was the fact that SA had broken an unwritten rule in the AU that anchor states should not occupy the position of chairperson of the AU to prevent power plays from paralysing the continent. In fact, one could argue that the bid by SA and Nigeria’s strong opposition to it (supported by a large Francophone block), was what caused the stalemate during the voting. If Dlamini-Zuma had won the vote and Nigeria would decide to oppose everything the chairperson does during her term simply because she is South African, that in itself would be extremely harmful to the continent. Indications are that Kenya, Egypt, Senegal, Ethiopia and other larger countries also voted against Dlamini-Zuma possibly reflecting a common resistance to SA, or indeed possibly any of Africa’s powerhouse countries to stand for the position of chairperson.
The events at the AU Summit these last couple of days have raised the profile of the AU and the Commission and placed renewed focus on the importance of strengthening the leadership of Africa’s continental institution. This is certainly an important step towards creating a more effective and efficient AU. In addition, the election has given Africa’s regional powers an opportunity to test their strength, in all likelihood in preparation for the much bigger future battle for a permanent seat on the UNSC. And the key lesson is clear – despite its relative power and influence, SA should not take its African support base for granted and should not readily assume, at the G20 or elsewhere, that it speaks for the continent.
- Jakkie Cilliers and Liesl Louw-Vaudran, Executive Director and Associate Editor, ISS Pretoria. This article was first published on the Institute for Security Studies (ISS) website. It is republished here with the permission of ISS.Author(s):Jakkie CilliersSouth African Democracy Slipping – SAIRR
The South African Institute of Race Relations (SAIRR) says that key indicators of democracy in South Africa have slipped since 2008.
SAIRR researcher, Georgina Alexander, points out that the survey, which is based on assessment of three international indexes, found that civil liberties have decreased.
Alexander says the falling scores could be attributed to issues such as media freedom and accountability of public officials.
"Proposed legislation such as the protection of state information bill passed by the National Assembly may adversely affect SA’s democracy rankings in the future," she explains.
To read the article titled, “Survey shows SA democracy slipping,” click here.Source:News24NGO Urges Committee to Take Hearings ‘Seriously’
The Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa (OSISA) says that given the dire straits in which the Gender Commission finds itself, the parliamentary portfolio committee responsible for the selection of new commissioners has a duty to take the process of public hearings seriously.
OSISA executive director, Sisonke Msimang, points out that the hearings that took place at the end of last week did little to inspire the confidence the commission so badly needs.
Msimang states that as she opened the two-day hearings, chairperson of the portfolio committee overseeing the process, Ruth Bhengu, made it clear that she has no time for what she termed, "The class of NGOs calling themselves civil society."
To read the article titled, “Parliamentary scorn for civil society a cause for concern,” click here.Source:Mail & GuardianSata’s Constitutional Court Hailed
The Operation Young Vote (OYV) has commended Zambian President, Michael Sata, for assuring the nation that his administration is committed to delivering a new Constitution within ninety days.
OYV executive director, Guess Nyirenda, points out that, “The agenda to have the new Constitution within such a short period of time is not only the answer expected by the citizens but also inspiring to Zambians.”
Nyirenda says the idea by the President to assemble experts to come up with the Constitution is welcome. He says however, that experts to be assembled should be all-inclusive.
To read the article titled, “NGO hails Sata Constitution call,” click here.Source:Zambia Daily MailCall to Create Whistle-Blowing Culture
The Open Democracy Advice Centre (ODAC) says there is a desperate need to create a culture of whistle-blowing in South Africa.
ODAC’s Alison Tilley says that, "Corruption and fraud costs South Africans in excess of R100 billion each year. It is eating at the very fabric of our society."
Tilley, whose organisation is concerned that the number of whistle-blowers is dropping, also called on the country to encourage them to keep coming forward.
To read the article titled, “SA urged to blow the horn on corruption,” click here.Source:Times LiveShared Moral Vision Key to Combatting Corruption
“Crisis? What crisis? There is no crisis in Zimbabwe.” Of the many colourful quotes attributed to former President Thabo Mbeki, this remains one of the most memorable; together perhaps with the famous mock homily on ‘fishers of corrupt men’ - a reference to those who dared suggest that the country’s mega arms procurement process in 2000 was rife with irregularities.
One wonders what exotic retort he would have nowadays given to the suggestion that South Africa is facing a moral crisis and that corruption is at the heart of it. Speculations aside, the extent of corruption in the country’s public and private sectors has been decried since Mandela’s presidency. Being among the issues that have featured prominently in South Africa’s moral regeneration initiative for more than a decade, one would have expected corruption to have by now generated widespread moral outrage. It should have rallied mass mobilisation reminiscent of the days of the liberation movement when a large majority of people could be united against a common enemy.
Corruption is often denounced as the enemy of the common good but common activism against it is not proving so common. Instead, a worrying bifurcation, almost akin to Mbeki’s famous ‘two nations’ diagnosis, is emerging.
On the one side is a majority of voters, mostly poor and semi-literate, that has continued, unfailingly, to entrust the African National Congress with public power at every election opportunity. On the other side is a motley crew of mostly well-educated, articulate and well-resourced minorities that also has, at times, legitimate claims to the liberation cause, but now indignant at the perceived moral degeneration that has befallen the liberation movement.
This is a stratum that seems hell-bent on promoting a society that teems with whistleblowers and crime busters fighting the symptoms of a moral decay, as opposed to the actual structural root causes. These two sides do not seem to be anywhere close to putting shared long-term interests above short-term gains, for the sake of creating a society where such moral crisis does not exist in the first place. This does not augur well for the country’s collective future well-being.
What is to be done to generate widely-shared moral repugnance against corruption? This is the million-dollar question that still bedevils policy-makers across the board. Fortunes in public funds have been spent experimenting with structures, programmes and processes that could deliver the holy grail of moral renewal. These structures and programmes have been at times built at the expense of obscuring the very content they were meant to promote. All this has arguably stemmed from the absence of a few vital ingredients necessary for moral regeneration to occur, including serious intolerance against corruption.
First is the need to craft a shared vision of the desired collective and individual behavioural change. The Moral Regeneration Movement (MRM), an initiative launched nearly a decade ago to restore the moral fibre of the South African society, has made some important headway in this regard. With important inputs from the bottom and top stratums of society, the movement has been able to compile and publish a Moral Charter for South Africa. This aspires to be a framework that establishes a broad consensus on the kind of values the nation should uphold, as well as a standard against which the moral character of citizens will be measured.
Unfortunately, the movement’s most powerful erstwhile patron, President Jacob Zuma, has not quite managed to stand in the public mind as an ideal example of moral rectitude. The extent to which this has compromised the movement’s momentum remains a lingering question. And it remains to be seen whether his acquittal on rape charges, and his unexpected decision to appoint a commission of inquiry into his old ‘arms deal’ nemesis, would eventually clear him of this moral blemish.
Second is commitment to dealing with the challenge of clarifying the role of civil society, especially at the grassroots level, in the country’s quest for moral regeneration. This is the sector that should drive the process of reaching a common agreement on shared moral values for our young democracy. Poor clarification of roles has at times meant that the people and communities vital to the success of the MRM are not optimally positioned to support it fully.
Finally, the discourse of spirituality and religion, which has characterised much of the moral regeneration agenda in the past, may need to be kept in check, as this may alienate many of those who may feel uncomfortable with the association of morality with religion, including the belief that one has to be religious to be moral and has to believe in God to be good. Morality has governed societies long before the arrival of religion, which means that moral goodness can be found in people who have no religion.
The recent shift in focus towards emphasising the Constitution, the Constitutive Act of the African Union, and the United Nations Universal Declaration on Human Rights, as sources of positive public moral values, should go a long way in easing this discomfort.
That shared moral values are the bedrock of any decent society, where selfishness and greed give way to the promotion of the common good, cannot be gainsaid. Our dark past has done little to foster a sense of national pride, but it did become a rallying point for many to fight for the common good. Corruption, no doubt a mirror of our past, is a threat to this hard-won gain.
While it is important to understand the roots of the malaise, the past should not be used as an excuse to turn a blind eye to it. Defeating corruption will take a unified moral stance where the haves and have-nots sincerely commit to bridge the class, race and political divide to speak with one common voice.
- Andile Sokomani, Senior Researcher, Corruption and Governance Programme ISS Cape Town Office. This article was first published on the Institute for Security Studies (ISS) website. It is republished here with the permission of ISS.Author(s):Andile SokomaniANC Regime Equal to Apartheid – WikiLeaks
The African National Congress (ANC) is seen as slipping away from democratic practices reminiscent of the regime it fought to overthrow, especially in its handling of the Abahlali baseMjondolo (AbM), according to a United States diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks. .
It says the ANC, which led South Africa out of apartheid had by 2010, slipped into anti-democratic practices reminiscent of the regime it fought to overthrow.
The cable, titled, ‘Is the ANC as Democratic as it Claims?’, dated 8 January 2010, gives insight assessment of the ANC following in the footsteps of the white-minority regime in its handling of AbM, shack dwellers movement.
In the same vein, political analyst, Steven Friedman, says attempts to crush the people of the AbM movement because they were seen as a threat to the ANC leaders was undemocratic.
To read the article titled, “ANC regime ‘equal to apartheid govt’,” click here.Source:The CitizenANC Criticised Over Botswana Comments
The Centre for the Study of Democracy at the University of Johannesburg says that the African National Congress (ANC) is treating its youth league leniently over its threat to help bring about regime change in Botswana.
The Centre’s director, Steven Friedman, has described the Botswana comments as a major embarrassment to South Africa’s foreign policy, adding that he expected more from the ANC.
Friedman further argues that he had long believed that the ANC Youth League president, Julius Malema, is under the protection of powerful politicians within the ANC.
"If he is not forced to apologise at the very least, one could say he's still being protected," he explains.
To read the article titled, “The Malema conundrum,” click here.Source:Mail&GuardianSA Urged Not to Provide Financial Assistance to Swaziland
Swazi pro-democracy campaigners have urged South Africa not to give their country financial assistance without imposing conditions aimed at steering the troubled kingdom towards negotiations for a transitional government.
A delegation of union leaders and activists, as well as politicians from two banned political parties, travelled to South Africa to lobby against the handout, which is believed to be in the region of R1.2 billion.
In the same vein, leader of the People's United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO), Mario Masuku, pointed out that, "We need a commitment from our head of state and government that they are prepared to work towards a democratic process in Swaziland."
To read the article titled, “Swazi loan 'like giving money to a drunk wife-beater',” click here.Source:Mail&GuardianCorruption Rife in Local Councils – Idasa Survey
According to the Institute for Democracy in South Africa (Idasa) survey, rural South Africans think their councillors are corrupt, ineffective and unresponsive.
The survey found that about 70 percent of people polled in rural areas of four provinces said councillors are not doing a good job and municipalities did not provide a good service.
Released just six weeks before the next local government election on 18 May 2011, the survey also found that though the government consistently claims the provision of safe water as its greatest success, more than half of those questioned say it remains their biggest challenge and barely one in five said water services had improved after the past year.
To read the article titled, “Corruption endemic in local councils: survey,” click here.Source:Times Live
Printer-friendly version
Vacancies
-
09/02/2012
-
09/02/2012
-
09/02/2012
-
10/02/2012
Events
-
Monday, February 13, 2012
-
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
-
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Opportunities
-
10/02/2012
-
10/02/2012
-
13/02/2012
-
14/02/2012
-
15/02/2012
